巍巖 李柬의 人物性同論의 의미와 지향

Abstract

How to define ‘Original Nature(本然之性)’ and ‘Physical nature(氣質之性)’ was the main point to the ‘Inmulseong(人物性, human nature and animal nature)’ issue. Yi Gan opposed to Han Won-jin’s ‘Inmulseong-iron(人物性異論, argument of the difference between human nature and animal nature)’, the contention that insists human nature and animal nature are different. Mainly his objection was to against Han Won-jin’s insistent that defines ‘Five constant Virtues(五常)’ in terms of temperament. Yi Gan regarded that his contention would damage absolute universality of human nature and fundamental perfection of human virtues and ‘innate goodness(性善)’. Inmulseong matter is closely related to ‘Mibal(未發, unaroused mind)’ issue. Therefore, understanding the relation between Inmulseong and Mibal could provide appropriate perception of Yi Gan’s ‘Inmulseong-dongron(人物性同論, argument of the sameness between human nature and animal nature)’, the insistent that contends human nature and animal nature are the same. On the Mibal issue, Yi Gan intended to separate Mibal state from temperament for ensuring pure goodness. Under this intention, mind(心), temperament and nature(or five constant virtues) became important concepts to his contention. Temperament and nature were importantly addressed in both two main matters(Inmulseong and Mibal). Especially, five constant virtues(nature) were the notion that mediates the two issues. Considering the notional mediator could show theoretical relationship between the two issues.